Dagobert Michelsen <[email protected]> writes: > Hi, > > I vaguely remember the package naming policy allows several different > variants of package names like > CSWfoo-dev > CSWfoodev > CSWfoodevel > CSWfoo-devel > > I propose to stick to one consistent naming and retire all other ones. > Specifically I propose to force naming to CSWfoo-devel now that we have > longer package names.
Working yesterday on this kind of stuff I remarked that the majority of our development packages follow this convention and use _devel suffix (116 of 117 explicitly identified as development packages). So it's too late to use the _dev suffix without changing a lot of packages name, even though I would preferred _dev as its shorter, deliver enough information and its homogeneous with other distributions. -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
